Bronson D. James on behalf of Shannon Mae Hickman
Ryan E. Scott on behalf of Dale Ryan Hickman
Cecil A. Reniche-Smith on behalf of State of Oregon

Comments:

*WILL NOT BE WEBCAST

Statement of Issues:

State of Oregon v. Shannon Mae Hickman (S061896) (Control) (A150127) (appeal from Clackamas County Circuit Court; State of Oregon v. Dale Ryan Hickman (S061902) (A150126) (appeal from Clackamas County Circuit Court).
Defendants Shannon Mae Hickman and Dale Ryan Hickman have been granted review of separate Court of Appeals decisions that summarily affirmed their convictions for manslaughter in the second degree in the death of their prematurely-born son.

On review, the issues are:

(1) Do Article I, section 2, and Article I, section 3, of the Oregon Constitution prohibit criminal prosecutions for religiously based practices resulting in a prohibited criminal result, on less than a "knowing" mental state?

(2) Is faith healing a religious practice protected under Meltebeke v. BOLI, 322 Or 132, 903 P2d 351 (1995), or is it merely an act motivated by belief?

The foregoing summary of a Supreme Court case that is scheduled for oral argument has been prepared for the benefit of the public. Parties and practitioners should rely on neither the factual summary set out above, nor the statement of issues to be decided, as delineating the questions that the Supreme Court ultimately may consider on review. See generally Oregon Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.20.